DWP failed in communicating women’s state pension age changes

In a report published on Tuesday, which confirms the preliminary findings, the PHSO stated that these failings occurred from 2005 onwards, which amount to “maladministration”.

Campaign groups BackTo60 and Women Against State Pension Inequality have claimed over the years that when the 1995 Conservative government’s Pensions Act included plans to increase the women’s state pension age to 65 — the same as men’s — the changes were implemented unfairly, with little or no personal notice.

The movements also claim the changes were implemented faster than promised with the Pensions Act 2011, leaving women with no time to make alternative plans, leading to devastating consequences.

The ombudsman found that the DWP “failed to take adequate account of the need for targeted and individually tailored information”, after research recommended that material on the pension age changes should be “appropriately targeted”.

The PHSO stated: “We consider that, if DWP had made a reasonable decision in August 2005 and then acted promptly, it would have written to affected women to tell them about changes to their state pension age by, at the latest, December 2006.

“This is 28 months earlier than the DWP actually wrote to them. It follows that these women should have had at least 28 months’ more individual notice of the changes than they got. The opportunity that additional notice would have given them to adjust their retirement plans was lost.”

Amanda Amroliwala, chief executive at the PHSO, said: “After a detailed investigation, we have found that the DWP failed to act quickly enough once it knew a significant proportion of women were not aware of the changes to their state pension age.

“We will now consider the impact of these failings and what action should be taken to address them.”

In response to the PHSO report, a DWP spokesperson said: “Both the High Court and Court of Appeal have supported the actions of the DWP, under successive governments dating back to 1995, and the Supreme Court refused the claimants permission to appeal.

“In a move towards gender equality, it was decided more than 25 years ago to make the state pension age the same for men and women.”

Tom Selby, senior analyst at AJ Bell, noted that while the ombudsman found the information provided between 1995 and 2004 was “accurate and of a reasonable standard, those affected have every right to be angry that evidence provided to the DWP in 2004 that improvements to communications could be made was not acted on swiftly”.

He added: “What we still don’t know is what, if any, compensation will be provided to women as a result of this finding. The ombudsman now plans to look at the impact this injustice had, which will undoubtedly lead to more pressure for a resolution.

“Given the parlous state of UK finances, calls in some quarters to compensate women affected in full — which could amount to six years’ of state pension payments — are likely to fall on deaf ears.”